In view of the foregoing, the court holds that the alleged violation of Articles 20 and 22 of the African Charter, is unfounded. Be that as it may, there is need to ascertain what further steps the Defendant took upon receipt of the series of complaint as alleged? It is trite that states have a duty to promptly investigate reports being made to them with the view of bringing the violators to book which will in turn serve as a deterrent to other hoodlums. Particularly as the complaints relate to human rights of citizens. The Defendant argued that it cannot be held responsible for crimes committed by unidentified and unknown persons particularly, since the perpetrators of the ethnic unrest are entirely unconnected and unknown to it or any of its agencies. That during the crisis, it deployed all security agencies for the purpose of controlling any form of unrest. The Defendant failed to prove that it conducted an effective investigation into the alleged acts by armed hoodlums and displacement of the members of the Ette community. They did not present evidence to disprove the allegation but kept silent with regards to the series of violations encapsulated in the Plaintiffs application amounting to a violation of their rights which, but for other reasons adduced herein could have succeeded. 24